403 15th Street, Port Allen, LA 70767 · W. Baton Rouge County · (225) 346-8815
125 certified beds, about 114 residents a day · For profit - Limited Liability company · Medicare and Medicaid since 2004
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 195599 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on August 27, 2025, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Louisiana average is 6.4, the national average 9.2).
Of 47 health citations since June 2023, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (4 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $140,868 in the last three years; the largest was $130,507, and the latest is dated March 18, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.76 across Louisiana and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.14 of those hours.
47.1% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Louisiana average 47.6%).
CMS links it to Legacy Nursing & Rehabilitation, an affiliated group of 11 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 47 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from neglect for 1 (#1) of 5 residents reviewed for transportation. This was evidenced by: 1. S3TD neglecting to appropriately secure Resident #1 into the facility van; and2. S3TD neglecting to notify the facility when Resident #1 fell out of the moving van. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation for Resident #1, a wheelchair dependent resident, on 02/17/2026 at 12:30 p.m. when S3TD failed to appropriately secure Resident #1 into the facility's transportation van. As S3TD was driving out of the facility's parking lot, the van hit a pothole, the van's back door opened, ramp fell, and Resident #1 rolled out of the van onto the gravel driveway. S3TD stopped the van, assisted Resident #1 back into the van, and drove away without notifying the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews the facility failed to ensure an allegation of neglect was reported to the administrator immediately and to the State Survey Agency within 24 hours for 1(#1) of 5 residents investigated for neglect. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Abuse Reporting and Investigation Policy and Procedure revealed in part, the following:Policy:1. All reports of resident neglect shall be promptly reported to local, state, and federal agencies (as defined by current regulations). Reporting:1. All alleged violations involving neglect will be reported by the facility Administrator, or his/her designee, and in turn they will notify to the following persons or agencies, as applicable:a. The State licensing/certification agency responsible for surveying/licensing the facility.2. An alleged violation neglect will be reported immediately, but not later than:b. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure the services provided as outlined in the comprehensive care plan met quality professional standards. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff administered supplements per professional standards for 1 (#2) of 3 sampled residents reviewed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident at risk for pressure ulcer development received care consistent with professional standards of practice, to prevent pressure ulcers. This deficient practice was evidenced by failing to ensure a resident with orders for a pressure reducing seat cushion intervention was implemented for 1 (#2) of 3 residents reviewed who were at risk for pressure ulcers.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident #5, a resident identified as High Risk for Falls, remained as free of accident hazards as possible. This deficient practice was evidence by failure to implement an effective Fall Prevention Program which ensured:1. Resident #5's Care Plan was updated to reflect each fall for 1 (#5) of 3 residents reviewed for falls; and2. A new fall prevention intervention was identified, implemented and updated in Resident #5's Care Plan following each fall for 1 (#5) of 3 residents reviewed for falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to provide services with reasonable accommodation of needs by failing to ensure call lights were in reach for 2 (#82 and #109) of 33 residents reviewed for accommodation of needs in the initial pool.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect each residents' right to personal privacy for 2 (#4 and #6) of 9 (#1, #4, #6, #52, #62, #74, #88, #116, and #130 ) residents observed during personal care and treatment procedures. The facility failed to ensure:1. Resident #6 was provided privacy during incontinence care; and2. Resident #4 was provided privacy during medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an accurate Minimum Data Set assessment for 1 (#19) of 2 (#6 and #19) residents reviewed for falls. The facility failed to ensure falls were accurately coded for Resident #19. Review of Resident #19's Clinical Record revealed an admission date of 12/26/2023. Review of Resident #19's Discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 06/27/2025 revealed the following, in part:Section J: Health ConditionsJ1800-Any falls since admission/entry or reentry or prior assessment. Marked 0. No. J1900-Number of falls since admission/entry or reentry or prior assessment. Marked blank. Review of the facility's incident log dated 02/25/2025 to 08/25/2025 revealed Resident #19 had an unwitnessed fall on 06/26/2025 and 06/27/2025. On 08/27/2025 at 12:45 p.m., an interview was conducted with S15LPN. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident with a newly evident or possible serious mental disorder was referred for a Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) Level II evaluation as required for 1 (#71) of 5 (#2, #7, #38, #71, and #89) sampled residents reviewed for PASRR Level II.Review of the facility's undated policy, titled, Preadmission Screening, PASARR (Resident Review) revealed in part, the following: Procedure: Coordination shall include:2. Referring.all residents with newly evident or possible serious mental disorder, intellectual disability, or a related condition for level II resident review upon a significant change in status assessment. Review of the Resident #71's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE]. Further review revealed he was diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder on 02/10/2025. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure interventions for Aphasia were implemented as identified on the care plan for 1 of 1 (#84) residents reviewed for communication difficulty. Review of Resident #84's Clinical Record revealed he was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included Cerebral Infarction, Aphasia, and Major Depressive Disorder. Review of Resident #84's Quarterly MDS with an ARD of 07/01/2025 revealed a BIMS of 10, which indicated his cognition was moderately impaired. Further review of Section B: Speech, Hearing, and Vision, revealed Resident #84 had unclear speech and was sometimes understood by others. Review of Resident #84's current Care Plan revealed the following:Focus: Resident is aphasic related to CVA. Uses a communication board to assist with communicating. Intervention: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure services were provided by the facility to meet quality professional standards. The facility failed to ensure nursing staff followed manufacturer instructions for use of an inhaler to prevent side effects of the medication for 1 (#88) of 4 (#52, #74, #88, and #130) residents reviewed for medication administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out ADLs received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (#107) of 5 (#6, #38, #71, #93, and #107) residents reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to trim and clean fingernails for Resident #107. Review of the facility's undated policy titled, Nail Care Policy and Procedure, revealed the following, in part:5. To promote cleanliness. Procedure: 1. Care of fingernails and toenails is part of the bath.2. Be certain nails are clean.4. Nails are to be clipped and filed smoothly. Review of the Medical Record for Resident #107 revealed the resident was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis Affecting Right Dominant Side and Neuroleptic Induced Parkinsonism. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to provide necessary care and services for the provision of respiratory care in accordance with professional standards. The facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was properly labeled for 1 (#89) of 1 (#89) residents reviewed for oxygen therapy. Review of Resident #89's Clinical Record revealed she was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses, which included Chronic Respiratory Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Emphysema, and Chronic Diastolic (Congestive) Heart Failure. Review of Resident #89's current Physician's Orders revealed the following, in part:Start date: 05/27/2025: Administer oxygen at 2 Liters per minute via nasal cannula, every shift for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Emphysema, Congestive Heart Failure, and Shortness of Breath. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure garbage and waste were properly contained in the outdoor trash dumpster.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure a resident's MAR (Medication Administration Record) was accurately documented for 1 (#21) of 31 residents included in the final sample. Review of the facility's undated policy titled Documentation and Charting Guidelines, revealed the following, in part:Purpose: The purpose of Charting and Documentation is to provide the following: a complete account to the resident's care. Review of Resident #21's clinical record revealed she was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses which included Dementia with other Behavioral Disturbance. Review of Resident #21's admission MDS (Minimum Data Set) with ARD (Assessment Reference Date) of 08/19/2025 revealed BIMS of 13, which indicated she was cognitively intact. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to implement and maintain an infection prevention and control program designed to provide a safe, sanitary, and comfortable environment and to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable diseases and infections. The facility failed to ensure staff:1. Performed hand hygiene during medication administration for 1 (#88) of 5 (#52, #62, #74, #88 and #130) residents observed during medication administration; and2. Donned the appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during medication administration for 1 of 1 (#4) residents reviewed for feeding tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident received necessary respiratory care consistent with professional standards of practice for 3 of 3 (#1, #2, and #R2) residents reviewed for respiratory care. The facility failed to ensure: 1. A protocol was implemented for cleaning and/or replacing Resident #1's non-invasive ventilation tubing and mask; and 2. Oxygen tubing and humidification bottles were changed in a timely manner for 2 (#2 and #R2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #R2) residents reviewed for oxygen therapy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure correct installation, use, and maintenance of bed rails. The facility failed to ensure: 1. The risks and benefits were reviewed with the resident and/or resident representative, and informed consent was obtained prior to bed rail installation for 1 (#1) of 4 (#1, #3, #R1, and #R3) residents reviewed with bed rails; and 2. Each resident was assessed for risk for entrapment prior to bed rail installation for 4 of 4 (#1, #3, #R1, and #R3) residents reviewed with bed rails.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure services were provided by the facility to meet quality professional standards for 1 (#R2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #R2) sampled residents reviewed with oxygen therapy. The facility failed to ensure Physician Orders for oxygen therapy were obtained for Resident #R2 prior to administration.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's medical record was complete and accurate by failing to ensure baths were documented as provided for 1 (#1) of 4 (#1, #2, #3, and #4) residents reviewed for activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure there was a functioning call system to allow residents to call for staff assistance for 1 (#R1) of 7 (#1, #2, #3, #4, #R1, #R2 and #R3) residents reviewed for environment. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 122 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to ensure alleged violations involving verbal abuse were reported to the state agency within 2 hours after the allegations were made for 1 (#2) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) residents reviewed for abuse.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure each resident was provided a safe, clean, and comfortable interior by failing to ensure necessary housekeeping and maintenance services were maintained for 2 (Room A and Room C) of 6 rooms reviewed for environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to transmit MDS assessments in the required timeframe for 8 of 8 (#11, #12, #22, #24, #34, #45, #53, #110) residents reviewed for resident assessment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure resident's MDS assessments accurately reflected the resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) status for 2 (#22 and #108) of 8 (#13, #22, #24, #55, #61, #99, #108, and #111) residents reviewed for PASARR.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews, the facility failed to coordinate assessments with the resident's Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) Level II by failing to incorporate PASARR Level II determinations and recommendations into each resident's assessment and care plan for 4 (#13, #22, #24, and #108) of 8 (#13, #22, #24, #55, #61, #99, #108, #111) residents reviewed for PASARR.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with respect and dignity in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life for 1 (#61) of 33 residents reviewed in the initial pool for dignity. The facility failed to ensure staff treated Resident #61 with respect and dignity.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure residents call lights were within reach for 2 of 2 (#1 and #16) residents reviewed for accommodation of needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to promote and facilitate residents' self-determination through support of the residents' choice about aspects of his or her life in the facility that were significant to the resident for 1 (#61) of 33 residents in the initial pool. The facility failed to ensure Resident #61 had a choice of when to go to bed.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident who was unable to carry out ADLs received the necessary services to maintain good grooming and personal hygiene for 1 (#61) of 2 (#61 and #99) residents reviewed for ADL's. The facility failed to trim and clean fingernails for Resident #61.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible by failing to ensure a padded wall was properly secured for 1 (#26) of 3 (#26, #40, #109) residents reviewed for accidents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure nursing staff communicated a significant change in status to the resident's physician for 2 (#3 and #R4) of 8 (#1, #2, #3, #R1, #R2, #R3, #R4, and #R5) residents reviewed for notification of change. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 05/31/2024 at 4:00 a.m. when S4LPN failed to notify Resident #3's physician when the resident had no urine output. On 05/30/2024 at 2:56 p.m., Resident #3 was observed to be lethargic and weak, which resulted in S6NP ordering 500 cc normal saline via intravenous infusion and lab work in the morning. On 05/31/2024 at 4:00 a.m., S4LPN attempted to collect urine from Resident #3 with an in and out catheter which resulted in no urine. The resident's brief was also observed to be dry at that time. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and each resident's physical needs including assess, monitor, and record accurate intake/output for a resident receiving IV therapy for 1 (#3) of 5 (#3, #R1, #R2, #R3, and #R5) residents reviewed for IV therapy. This deficient practice resulted in an Immediate Jeopardy situation on 05/30/2024 at 2:56 p.m., when Resident #3 began receiving IV fluids as ordered for lethargy and weakness. On 05/31/2024 at 4:00 a.m., S4LPN attempted to collect urine from Resident #3 with an in and out catheter which resulted in no urine. The resident's brief was also observed to be dry at that time. There was no documentation of each shift's total intake and output. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review the facility failed to be administered in a manner that enabled it use its resources effectively and efficiently by failing to implement a system to provide quality care to meet the needs of each resident by failing to: 1. Ensure nursing staff communicated a resident's significant change in condition to the physician after having no urine output while receiving IV therapy for 1 (#3) of 5 (#3, #R1, #R2, #R3, and #R5) residents reviewed for receiving IV therapy; and 2. Ensure a resident received treatment and care in accordance with professional standards of practice and each resident's physical needs including assess, monitor, and record accurate intake/output for a resident receiving IV therapy for 1 (#3) of 5 (#3, #R1, #R2, #R3, and #R5) residents reviewed for IV therapy. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure nurse staffing data, including resident census, and total number and actual hours worked for licensed and unlicensed nursing staff, was posted on a daily basis in a prominent location readily accessible to residents and visitors. This deficient practice had the potential to affect any of the 118 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record reviews and interviews the facility failed to ensure a plan of care was developed and implemented for 5 (#3, #R1 #R2, #R3, and #R4) of 8 (#1, #2, #3, #R1 #R2, #R3, #R4, and #R5) residents who had intravenous fluids ordered for hydration purposes.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to ensure completed care was documented correctly in resident's records for 3 (#3, #R1, and #R2) of 8 (#1, #2, #3, #R1, #R2, #R3, #R4, and #R5) sampled residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's physician and responsible party were notified after a fall for 1 (#1) of 3 (#1, #2, and #3) residents reviewed for falls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure each resident was treated with dignity and respect and in an environment which promoted maintenance and enhancement of his/her quality of life for 1(#32) of 32 residents reviewed in the initial pool. The facility failed to ensure Resident #32 was not left lying in bed unclothed with no bed linen on his mattress and the door and privacy curtain opened for others to see him when passing by his room.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure: 1. CNA staff notified the nurse of a resident's change in condition for 1 (#114) of 26 residents investigated; and 2. Nursing staff notified the practitioner of a significant decline in 1 (#114) of 26 residents investigated.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to maintain a safe, functional, and sanitary environment for 13 (#8, #15, #17, #28, #32, #34, #35, #62, #66, #75, #82, #104, and #516) of 32 residents included in the initial pool, as evidenced by: 1. a loose toilet and missing baseboard behind the toilet in the bathroom adjoining Rooms b and d for Residents #35 and #82; and 2. a stained mattress and stained wall in Room l for Resident #32; and 3. a loose sink, a loose baseboard, a cracked sink faucet, a cracked non-functioning hot water knob, 1 non-functioning light bulb, and no paper towels in the bathroom adjoining Rooms m and o for Residents #15, #62, #66, and #75; and 4. a soiled privacy curtain in Room k for Resident #516; and 5. a soiled privacy curtain in Room l for Resident #32; and 6. a soiled privacy curtain in Room n for Resident #8, and 7. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, and interview the facility failed to develop comprehensive care plan and furnish services to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being. The facility failed to implement physicians orders for 1(#56) of 3 (#51, #56, and #95) residents reviewed for contractures/range of motion.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure 3 (#20, #27, and #35) of 3 (#20, #27, and #35) residents reviewed for activities of daily living received the necessary services to maintain personal hygiene for nail care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure 1 (#51) of 3 (#51, #56, and #95) residents reviewed for range of motion received services and assistance to maintain or improve mobility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the resident environment remained as free of accident hazards as possible for 11 (#22, #24, #35, #40, #41, #52, #60, #73, #82, #89, #102) of 27 ( #8, #15, #17, #21, #22, #24, #28, #32, #34, #35, #37, #40, #41, #44, #52, #59, #60, #66, #73, #75, #82, #89, #102, #104, #107, #113, #516 ) residents reviewed for accident hazards as evidenced by failing to ensure the water temperature in resident sinks remained under 120 degrees Fahrenheit.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and prepare food under sanitary conditions by failing to ensure: 1. Food was properly stored in the walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer; 2. Food was properly stored in the dry food storage room; 3. A ceiling vent was clean and free from debris; 4. Two wall vents were clean and free from debris; 5. Exposed pipes were clean and free from debris; and 6. A hanging pot rack was clean and free from debris.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews and record review, the facility failed to ensure an allegation of physical abuse was reported to the administrator, and to the State Agency within two hours for 1 (#113) of 32 residents reviewed for abuse in the initial pool process.
2 fire safety citations on file: 2 on August 14, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| March 18, 2026 | Fine | $10,361 |
| June 24, 2024 | Fine | $130,507 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Louisiana | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.24 | 3.76 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.14 | 0.31 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.78 | 3.21 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.12 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.98 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 47.1% | 47.6% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 41.6% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.65 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.43 on weekdays and 2.78 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.24 | 0.14 | 3.43 | 2.78 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 114 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.47 | 0.13 | 3.68 | 2.96 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 110 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.31 | 0.20 | 3.58 | 2.62 | 5.1% | 0 of 92 | 114 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.30 | 0.24 | 3.51 | 2.77 | 12.8% | 0 of 91 | 116 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Louisiana, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.26 | 3.86 | 3.10 | 3.6% | 0.9% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Louisiana, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $14.67 | $13.97 to $16.87 | 20,690 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $27.63 | $23.87 to $29.43 | 17,600 |
| Registered nurses | $38.57 | $33.19 to $45.00 | 48,970 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Louisiana | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.3 | 17.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.6 | 3.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.6 | 17.9 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.1 | 5.6 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 51.3 | 22.7 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.2 | 28.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 6.1 | 14.8 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.5 | 2.6 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.7 | 2.7 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Legacy Nursing and Rehabilitation of Port Allen's Medicare short-stay residents. How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 51.5% · Louisiana: 16 better, 33 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 4 eligible stays.
9.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Louisiana: 0 better, 3 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 43 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Louisiana: 1 better, 7 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 23 eligible stays.
50.0% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana50.0% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 52 residents counted.
1.5% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana1.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 66 residents counted.
1.5% this home
Median of homes: Louisiana2.8% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 66 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Louisiana100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 3 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: PORT ALLEN CARE CENTER, LLC. CMS links this home to Legacy Nursing & Rehabilitation, a group of 11 nursing homes averaging 1.5 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gum Management, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 10/27/2021 | |
| Legacy Management Group, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 10/27/2021 | |
| Port Allen Care Center, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 11/24/1992 | |
| Gum, John Nathaniel | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 10% | 06/30/2004 |
| Gum, Victor | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 06/17/2004 | |
| Jones, Deidra | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 10/05/2020 | |
| Legacy Management Group, LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/27/2021 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Louisiana. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.